4.7 Article

Standardizing the Reporting of Incidental, Non-Lung Cancer (Category S) Findings Identified on Lung Cancer Screening Low-Dose CT Imaging

Journal

CHEST
Volume 161, Issue 6, Pages 1697-1706

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2021.12.662

Keywords

incidental findings; low-dose chest CT imaging; lung cancer screening; Lung-RADS; structured reporting

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Standardization of reporting positive findings on low-dose CT scans is crucial for high-quality lung cancer screening. Developing a structured system for standardized reporting can help reduce the risk of variability in reporting and unnecessary evaluations.
Lung cancer screening is slowly but steadily entering the realm of preventive health maintenance. Standardization of reporting of positive findings identified on screening low-dose CT (LDCT) scans, specifically lung nodules, is a key element of high-quality lung cancer screening. The American College of Radiology developed the Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) system for this purpose. In addition to detailed categorization of lung nodules, Lung-RADS identifies category S for other incidental findings identified on screening LDCT scans. In contrast to the highly structured reporting for nodules, category S findings are reported at the discretion of individual readers, with the potential for high variability of reporting. Incidental findings on lung cancer screening studies are common, may trigger unwarranted evaluation with potential harm and cost, and may precipitate patient distress. In response to these concerns, our multidisciplinary lung cancer screening program developed a structured system for standardized reporting of category S findings based on recommendations of the American College of Radiology and relevant specialty societies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available